SARIF HOSSAIN,KOLKATA V. DCWT, CIRCLE 8(2), KOLKATA

WTA 1/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sarif Hossain against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, which had dismissed his appeal due to the non-availability of a copy of Form No. 35, statement of facts, and grounds of appeal. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was arbitrary and without proper reasoning, leading to the decision to restore the case to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The Tribunal did not object to the assessee's request to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 37509 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Wealth Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVEEN KISHORE
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL KOCHAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER WTA No. 1/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sarif Hossain 97, Park Street, Trimurti Apartment, 4th Floor, Kolkaeta-700016. (PAN: ABLPH2216D) Vs DCWT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 01.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-20 [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/23/2024- 25/1071677620(1) dated 30.12.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2013-14. 2. Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT, DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad-in-law, to the extent to which they are prejudicial to the interests of the appellant. 2 WTA No.1/Kol/2025 Sarif Hossain, AY: 2013-14 2. For that the Ld. CIT (A) ought not to have dismissed the appeal of the appellant on the ground of non-availability of the alleged copy of Form 35, Statement of Facts & Grounds of Appeal. 3. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant in absence of the requisite Forms of Appeal along with copy of the Order etc. on alleged grounds. 4. For that the Order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is perverse in nature. 5. For that the Order of the Ld. CIT (A) is otherwise erroneous and prejudicial and needs to be set aside for fresh consideration. 6. For that the appellant craves leave to amend, alter, modify, substitute, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds.” 4. At the time of hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad in law because the Ld. CIT(A) ought not to have dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-availability of the copy of Form No. 35, statement of facts and grounds of appeal. Hence, he prayed before the Bench to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issues to his file for adjudication afresh. Ld. CIT, DR did not raise much objection to this prayer of the Ld. AR of the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival contentions. Before us the Ld. AR of the assessee undertakes to file all the documents sought by the Ld. CIT(A) at the time of re-adjudication of the issues. Hence, this appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the appellate proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A) diligently. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 1st APRIL, 2025 JD, Sr. P.S. 3 WTA No.1/Kol/2025 Sarif Hossain, AY: 2013-14 Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Sh Sarif Hossain. 2. The Respondent. DCWT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata 3. CIT(A), Kolkata-20. 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata. "